Why don't all members of the Air Force have to be fully qualified to be a rifleman in case of hostile events?

Years ago I worked with an Army major who had been in the Air Police (whatever it was called then) in Vietnam. If you wanted to set him off, hint the Army defended air bases!

The airman is busy maintaining the aircraft the Army and Marines call for all the time. And the pilots really appreciate having an Airman that knows the aircraft they are being strapped into. Besides the Army and Marine guys need something to complain about other then our cushy beds, chow halls and food. But on another note, I was trained ona M16 in basic, I had to qualify with it and once upon a time I was even disqualified because the Army instructor could only count 35 hit out of 150, never mind the center of the target was gone, just saying!

I was in through the entire 90's. We had to be proficient.

When j went to. Bootcamp were learned base defense week of field training, week of rifle training then qualifying ..the yearly, qualifications were still required when I left 22 years later

If the Air Force is having to worry about ground combat for the average airman, we have *much* larger issues on hand.

Its just a bad idea for many reasons. It sounds good in a perfect scenario kind of way, but in real life it would never work out.
First, let's say that everyone in the USAF was qualified to use a service pistol or rifle. Where would all of this equipment be? Does every office have an armorer inside an armory just sitting there all day waiting for a scenario to dispense weapons? Does every service member have to have a service weapon on them at all times? Where do these weapons go when they are carrying out their actual duties? It would seem knowing how to minimally operate and clean a weapon would be of no use unless there was access to them.
Now let's get to the training. Do you really believe that just knowing how to properly load a weapon, clean it, and perhaps shoot a paper close by is enough training to engage a real person whether its a terrorist or active shooter? So, they would also have to be trained to be able to identify the actual threat, remember now that everyone in uniform is running around with a weapon, and engage the person without hitting anyone else nearby or behind.
There is just such a narrow possibility that the bad guys are going to be obvious to people that have no training other than the operation of the weapon.
So now we're training everybody on how to operate, clean, and shoot a weapon and also training everyone on target identification, different scenarios of shoot, dont shoot. Plus many more things.
Now you have to do all of this multiple times a year because those skills degrade quickly. There also has to be multiple armories all over the base with armorers ready to issue weapons and ammo in a chaotic situation, unless everyone is already armed. Couldnyou ever see anything wrong with that scenario?
Now what happens when a bunch of people can't qualify in those situations? Do we kick them out, hold them until they can, or just give them a weapon anyway?
There are so many scenarios where something goes really wrong here.
That is not even mentioning the cost of money and time that this would take away from their everyday duties.
Instead, we can have people that are qualified and do that job all of the time with the training and skills to accomplish that mission.

I am of the school that says you must be ready to defend yourself. This nonsense of not being able to use a current personal defense weapon (M16, M4, or M9) is silly.

The Air Force has a few other gun toters besides SF. There is TACP, Combat Controllers, etc.

The Air Force is about flying and fixing aircraft period. Everything else is in support of that mission. Space Command is still about the same, but at higher altitudes.

I served in the US Marine Corps. It did no matter what your MOS was. You had to know and qualify with the M16. Its noit just the Air Force, so in the Navy they don't have to train or qualify with the rifle either in Boot Camp. I do believe that all the branches should train and annually qualify. Its part of being a military personnel, to have the proficiency of handling the most basic weapon of any armed forces.